Ask me about continually throwing myself at the enemy and losing every single time in EU4 Multiplayer.

ReSeAu votes the following

1. The Tariff Abolition Act submitted by the Freedom Stability Party
No.
Free trade is certainly an admirable ideological goal. But to do so in such a manner without prior consultation or analysis would be foolhardy. In addition, a nation without tariffs would only benefit should its partners do the same. I see no evidence of this and thus currently do not support abolition of tariffs until a more comprehensive study has been conducted
2. The Sovereign Wealth Fund Act, submitted by Minister Radek
Abstain. As the one who would be administering it, I recuse myself from voting on the motion entirely
3. The Budget Bill for April 3062 submitted by Prime Minister Luxembourg
Yes
4. The Census Extension Act, an amendment to the prior passed Census Act, submitted by Minister Danube
Yes
5. The Bootstrap Act, submitted by Arthur Subtallier
No.
Member Subtallier's ideas for free education and his zeal to see an educated populace is to be applauded indeed. However, it's execution leaves much to be desired. I do not believe simply 'giving' training materials in lieu of actual teaching or training will be useful. Indeed, I fear it would likely cause more issues than it resolves (for example, individuals learning incorrectly). I cannot in good conscience support such a slipshod method of education.

On the matter of education, I must express my take on the furor that has been underway regarding the new curriculum. I am heartened to see Minister Bookchin re-evaluate his position and provide a potential compromise in light of the concerns raised by several members. I myself was concerned about the vast amount of subjects that a potential student would have to undergo and whether they resulted in a bias of subject matter at the expense of another (Humanities over science/creative arts) for example. I would strongly urge Minister Bookchin also consider combining several of the subjects into a broader category, such as Civic Studies/Engagment and Political Science, of which these issues could be a module rather than a course unto itself, in order to reduce the potential academic burden on the average Sirtan student

Bootstrap Act – This bill leaves plenty of room for discretion. Assuming the Ministry of Education places most currently taught subjects on the “useful to the Sirtan people” list, preparing special learning materials and algorithms for generating and grading unique tests would require an upfront cost of 3.5 million NSC. The periodic costs for running the program are negligible.

I know this is late, seeing as the voting phase is already over, but it could still be useful going forward.

From: Danube, Minister of Interior
To: Director of Citizen Records, Ministry of Interior
Subject: Census conduct
With the funding secured, we are finally ready to begin taking the census. Phase 1, the building survey, is to begin immediately. To help conduct this phase, I'd like you to form a "Census Investigation Task Force," whose job is to investigate properties whose owners are unknown or can't be contacted and to assemble a "phantom property list" of all such properties at the end of the census, which, depending on the scope of the problem, can either be referred to local governments (whatever form those might take when the census is finished) or dealt with legislatively. To conduct the survey, you are authorized to use local records, the latest satellite imagery, drones, and telepresence robots.
In the meantime, we can begin planning for phase 2, the population survey. I want a widespread awareness campaign underway this month over public notices and SCN advertising, and I want the population reports to be open to the public on May 1. When the survey is ready, work with the Ministry of Infrastructure's Communications Control to ensure every SCN-connected device gets rolling priority notifications. Give each household until June 30 to respond, and after that point, it shall be the CITF's job to track down stragglers using known residential properties which don't have a population report attached, and get them to fill out their report. Try to delegate the counting of the homeless population to community volunteers throughout the year where possible, and supplement with your own staff when extra numbers are necessary.

This is as good a time as any to remind you that you can use percentages of monthly income in the budget. For example, you could write something like “Ministry of Health – 10% of monthly income with a minimum of 68 million NSC”.

In any event, you have to submit a budget yet again this month, which probably takes time away from any other legislative ideas you might have, so I would advise you to think of a slightly more long-term solution this time. Of course, you don’t have to follow this advice if you don’t want to.

AFancyQuestionMark fucked around with this message at Dec 25, 2017 around 15:51

The current legal status of AMRs leaves a few loopholes. What if a person, for example, plans to commit a murder and makes an AMR of themself before that murder takes place. Legally we cannot prosecute their AMR for murder as the point of divergence happened before the crime took place. Therefore this bill is as follows

- AMRs are legally responsible for any crimes committed by their original copy, and will face the same or equivalent legal repercussions
- The original person is legally responsible for any crimes committed by their AMRs, and will face the same or equivalent legal repercussions

The Community would also like to submit another bill

The Rehabilitation Act

- The government will agree to establish free rehabilitation centers. People may voluntarily enter into these programs, or they may be sentenced to rehabilitation in place of more traditional punishment for consumption and possession of illegal addictive substances. These rehabilitation centers will initiate a program for their clients with the goal of stopping their current addictive substance use, and preventing their clients from using substances in the future. The program in question will be decided upon by a panel of licensed doctors who will decide on a national program, based primarily on efficacy of reducing drug relapse and improving overall health. People who voluntarily enter the program may withdraw at any time without legal consequence, though those sentenced to a rehabilitation center by a judge cannot withdraw from a program until their completion of the program.

I cannot see the rationale behind condemning an individual for the actions taken by another, despite the common history they may once have shared. Current law holds both responsible for any crimes committed before the brain-scan, which makes sense, as in this case the guilt remains. However once the scan is taken we have two distinct individuals, and to condemn one man for the crimes of the other, whatever the degree of similarity between the two, runs contrary to all known forms of justice.

This "AMR Accountability Act" betrays the blatant bio-chauvinism of The Community. This act presupposes that AMRs are by their nature either the same person as their creator or their puppets. This act is an attack on the personhood of AMRs.

Under Green and Vallstein, democracy was at best a sham, deteriorating to essentially nonexistent over time. The Revolution gave a chance for the People's voice to be heard, and heard it has been, but it must continue to be so, long after we are gone. So, it falls to us to lay the foundations to ensure that the freedom and fairness of the past election are safeguarded and maintained, regardless of who is in power. Thus I propose the Free and Fair Elections Act:

Free and Fair Elections Act posted:

Given the need to ensure that all elections in perpetuity are free from interference and fair for all participants,Recognising that we cannot predict the direction future political entities or individuals may go,Aware that even the nature of the Guardian Council can change over time once the limit of 21 members is reached and retirements start,It is proposed:
1. Each electoral district elects a nonpartisan citizen to the office of electoral oversight, with a duty to oversee all elections in that district.
2. The Office of Electoral Oversight may employ observers at each election to ensure there is no attempt to rig the vote or to intimidate voters.
3. The Office of Electoral Oversight is obliged to report on the freedom and fairness of each election, and to inform the public and parliament of any incidents which throw freedom or fairness into question.

"While I appreciate the sentiment behind this bill, its' implementation of that sentiment is deficient and may prove harmful over the long-term. It is irrational to expect that an elected position will remain fully impartial in all future elections. On the contrary, this bill only intensifies the problem it was designed to solve, as it makes the very process of fair elections dependent on the will of the majority of interested citizens at specific points in time. One doesn't need to be a historian to understand the dangers this presents. I oppose this bill vehemently.

The current process, which has an impartial organization under the Guardian Council manage all elections, with observers from all parties registered for a specific election present during all of its' stages, is a superior alternative, one that has already been proven in practice."

Those present are Committee Chair Councilor Saturn, Defence Minister Hill, Member Valance Farasi, Member Amnesty and Central Command Representative Lt. General William Worrel.

Saturn: “Good day to you all. I trust all of you know the agenda for today's meeting?”

Amnesty: “Please remind us, Councilor Saturn.”

Valance: “Of course, but a review for the transcript should be in order.”

Saturn: “Hmph. We are here to discuss the SDF's role in policing the streets of the cities while the new police structures are being set up. There are a number of items we must determine.
First, the Police Reform Act calls for the SDF to "maintain order" for the "transitional period", which the Internal Security Minister assured me is going to take about 2-3 months. The act doesn't specify what "maintaining order" means, so this is the first item we must discuss today. Any ideas?”

Hill: “While also helping train the newly formed police unions, was my understanding of the situation.”

Valance: “Including investigating crimes? That is not a soldier’s job. Fundamentally, the police are currently a negative influence on peace in our streets especially in Opal.”

Amnesty: “Perhaps they just mean to standby in case of a revolt or uprising? Though, that would be a strange thing for the SRLF to specify.”

Valance: “To restore and maintain order, the SDF must relieve the police of urban centers of their duties in totality: that means occupying the police station currently used more for gang warfare and intimidation than civil justice.”
Saturn: “My discussions with the Minister make clear that he intends the SDF to take over at least some policing duties during this period. The question is - which ones? As you said, it is unreasonable to expect soldiers to play the part of investigators.”

Valance: “Patrolling the streets and responding to calls by citizens about threats to their life and liberty seem suitable for soldiers, and are the core aims of the police. Long-term investigations into crimes such as burglary are too high a ask.”

Amnesty: “Considering the corruption present in the police forces, I don't think it would be unreasonable to assume they are meant to take over the police's duties in their entirety.”

Hill: “I would maybe suggest keeping at least some of the police investigators on for the transitional period. They can be used to help train the police unions and the presence of the SDF within the police stations should hopefully cut down on any corruption.”

Amnesty: “We can't be sure that these police investigators themselves aren't corrupt and if we rely on them to build our institutions, we will be left with corrupt institutions.”

Valance: “If they are uncorrupted, they'll join the new institutions and join in the training of those. For this period, the SDF shall patrol the streets: I hope it will help many people trust this new SDF after the revolution if they do their job well.”

Saturn: “At any rate, that question is outside the jurisdiction of this committee. Let's get back on track. One of the central aims of this meeting is to determine a rigid code of conduct for SDF soldiers policing the streets - which criminals to engage, how to engage them, what outcomes are acceptable for these confrontations, the ability to detain criminals and the length of that detention, interactions with the regular justice systems, etc. All of these are things we must have firm and clear answers to, so our soldiers know how to behave themselves.”

Valance: “There must be at leas some room for proactive operations: many drug Lords will harass our troops constantly if left too, and have well known hideouts ignored by corrupt police.”

Amnesty: “With regards to how to engage, the soldiers should only escalate in firepower to match a suspect's. If a suspect has a knife, our soldiers will use melee weapons. If the suspect has a gun, our soldiers will use guns. Preference should be given to non-lethal methods of detainment.”

Hill: “The SDF should focus on deescalating situations. I would rather our soldiers not murder citizens just because they think they might be armed. Getting suspects to stand down and treating them like human beings should be a priority. I agree that non-lethal methods should be used first and foremost. However…”

Amnesty: “Yes, I suppose the rules of engagement should specify that soldiers are not to use lethal force until someone attempts to use lethal force against them.”

Valance: “If our soldiers are being shot at however, they must be able to use lethal force to put down threats again them as forcefully as possible.”

Hill: “…in regards to gangs, powerful drug lord and cartels, we should come down on them like a proverbial fist. Those scum should not be allowed to harm the citizens of our nation. There has especially been a growing yakuza problem of late that I'd like to see curtailed.”

Valance: “I have no objection to saying our soldiers must see a firearm before firing, but they must be kept safe.”

Hill: “Even if there is a firearm out on a lone suspect, I would prefer they try to talk the person down. But groups should be dealt with more cautiously.”

Amnesty: “I think that having a warrant, for example against a gang hideout, should waive some of the rules of engagement.”

Saturn: “Warrants? Issued by whom?”

Valance: “The current police chiefs are mostly uncorrupted.”

Hill: “Are we sure about that?”

Saturn: “More importantly, we should clarify something. Is there a consensus among the members of this committee for allowing for proactive operations against gangs?”

Amnesty: “I don't think there's a consensus as of right now.”

Hill: “I agree that our soldiers should be proactive about going after gang and other criminal cartels, just so long as they understand this is not carte blanche to waive the rule of law.”

William: “Allow me to chime in. We mustn't forget that the civil war wasn't that long ago. Some citizens might react poorly to SDF soldiers fighting in the cities' streets.”

Amnesty: “The law, as it is written, implies that SDF soldiers will be doing some fighting
The best we can do in this meeting, I'm pretty sure, is make sure that SDF soldiers do not abuse the power we are about to give them.”

William: “And how do we intend to accomplish that, precisely?”

Amnesty: “A good question, one I'm not sure how to answer.”

William: “Responsible policing is not a trivial matter. Especially for those not trained for it.”

Amnesty: “How would you translate the act then? How is the SDF going to keep order in the transitional phase?”

William: “Obviously, they will need to patrol the streets and confront criminals in the act.”

Amnesty: “So you express concern that soldiers fighting in the street will worry some citizens; to fix this you suggest that soldiers patrol the street looking for people to fight.”

William: “We just have to maintain order until the new police structures are ready. There is no need to entertain any proactive operations. In essence, I propose that our soldiers act more like security guards than law enforcement.”

Hill: “While I admire the spirit of trying to maintain order, I worry that having our soldiers simply focus on being reactionary will let the already growing gang problems spiral out of control.”
Valance: “Sure, but is that more risky? If gang lords who are used to bribable police are confronted with active SDF patrols, will they either try and bribe or attack the SDF?”

Amnesty: “I don't think the gang problems or corrupt police is something we can just ignore until the new police structures are ready.”

William: “As the Councilor said, the transition should only take 2-3 months.”

Valance: ‘I understand that some may be uncomfortable with active SDF operations in our cities, more will be happy to be free the grip of crime and corruption.”

William: “I am pleased that your trust in us is so high as to believe that we could get rid of crime and corruption in 2 months time.”

Valance: “Purely reactionary operations gives carte blanche for the gangs - free of the police over lordship of their power - to get into active gang wars for a better poison when the transition is over.”

Amnesty: “I am not expecting the SDF to get rid of crime and corruption. I am expecting them to prevent it from getting worse in that time and I think that having the SDF act as "security guards" is not enough to bring that goal to fruition.”

Valance: “I don't believe it will all be solved. But a few successful, high profile raids on the public of gang Lords will cause the rest to be more circumspect and not openly challenge the SDF for the rest of the transition and maybe beyond, making it easier in the future.”

Hill: “I'm especially worried about the rumors that several gangs and cartels have managed to gain access to the political stage during these times of transition. I would hope that moving against them would force them to scuttle back into the shadows.”

William: “Suppose we go with this plan. What would these "successful raids" look like? It's not as though the SDF has the authority to do anything more than detain them for a while or kill them in the course of fighting.”

Amnesty: “If in these raids they find evidence of criminal wrongdoing, they can prosecute them.”

William: “The SDF is not properly equipped to "find evidence of wrongdoing".”

Amnesty: “What do the current police forces have that the SDF lacks?”

Valance: “The legal system is in slightly better shape: for many of these criminals a court would not approve bail regardless, and holding them in jails why due process works its’ course should be possible?”

William: “The current police forces, corrupt though they may be, have experience in non-lethal confrontations. The only experience the SDF has is fighting a war.”

Amnesty: “That is true. I suppose guard duty might be preferable then, if getting the SDF to do what we would like is simply not practical. I agree that the SDF don't have the skills to do this continuously, but a few early high level suspects would be good for the overall safety of our troops on this operation.”

Saturn: “Is there a consensus on the matter?”

Valance: “For tactical raids on known hideouts, war fighting experience may be useful. This is for operations where the police would expect resistance regardless.”

Amnesty: ‘Might it be a good idea to attach military observers to all major police operations? Assuming we trust the SDF to be less corrupt than the municipal police forces.”

Valance: “We are wholesale disbanding the current police as I understand it: the lower levels are too corrupt.”

Saturn: “That is correct.”

Amnesty: “Would everyone agree with this sentiment: The duty of the SDF during the transition between police structures will be as follows:

One, act as guards in order to secure both the streets and important governmental buildings.
Two, support local police forces in any operations in which they request assistance.
Three, attach observers to all major local police operations.”

Valance: “The local police no longer exist. Instead, point two should state - The SDF should actively patrol the streets of the police departments they replace.”

Amnesty: “Okay, then can we agree with this directive: The SDF will patrol the streets of the police departments they replace and maintain the security of all important governmental buildings.”

Hill: “Yes.”

Valance: “Point three should state - on patrol, when alerted to ongoing violence or disorder, they are to restore order by pacifying any hostile citizens, using non lethal methods at first and only escalating when a firearm is gestured or fired at them.”

William: “Pacifying, and then what, detaining them?”

Amnesty: “I fear having that sort of directive won’t do much. These are soldiers, and they’ll act like soldiers regardless of what we tell them.”

Valance: “A soldier learns to follow orders, surely?”

Hill: “I hope that the SDF had at least some sort of de-escalation training?

William: “I believe this committee should come up with a precise and unambiguous protocol on engaging hostile citizens.”

Valance: “A point four would state - if a suspect is pacified when attacking the SDF or other citizens, then they are to be detained in the former police jails while legal authorities work on charging them. This only allows them to be detained to the end of this transition period.
By the way, what equipment does the SDF have access to? Firearms surely, but are soldiers currently trained in melee or any non lethal implements?”

Amnesty: “They are only allowed to match the firepower of hostile citizens, not escalate. They are encouraged to use non-lethal force first, with lethal force only as a last measure.
The SDF will likely be trained in hand to hand combat, but specialty non-lethal equipment might be uncommon in their ranks.”

Valance: “Then yes. They may use melee weapons against others to subdue, but may only use firearms against others with them or when there is a imminent need to do so to save a life (eg: guy with knife approaches someone unarmed, soldier to far to intervene with melee in time)
The commander of whatever troops with work with the transitional-government appointed police chief of the area to set patrol priorities, routes and any proactive operations deemed necessary by the chief.”

Saturn: “We should combine all of these suggestions into a single document and vote on officially accepting it as a binding set of orders for the SDF. We must remove as much ambiguity as possible.”

Hill: “Agreed.”

Saturn: “If Valence would be as kind as to do so, since most of the suggestions are his?”

Valance: “Let’s just spend a few minutes to compile them: I'll present a document for a pass-fail vote, after some discussion if I missed anything.”

[Compiled document:

1) During the transitional period, the SDF will patrol the streets of the police departments they replace, take over all police buildings and maintain the security of all important governmental buildings. They may also make proactive operations against known gang lords and large criminal elements. The commander of the troops assigned to an area with work with the transitional-government appointed police chief of the area to set patrol priorities, routes and any proactive operations deemed necessary by the police chief, aided by others (see the bill).

2) When SDF soldiers are on patrol, and alerted to ongoing violence or disorder (or directed to do so by their leadership), they are to restore order by pacifying any hostile citizens, using non lethal methods at first. They may use melee weapons against others to subdue, but may only use firearms against others with them or when there is a imminent need to do so to save a life (e.g.: criminal with knife approaches someone unarmed, soldier to far too intervene with melee in time).

3) If a suspect is pacified when attacking the SDF or other citizens, then they are to be detained in the former police jails while legal authorities work on charging them for their exact crimes. This only allows them to be detained to the end of this transition period, pending further clarification on their status.]

Hill: “That all looks fine to me.”

Saturn: “Anything else any of you deem important?”

Valance: “A fourth section which I feel is necessary.”

[Addition to document:

4) If the SDF witness an ongoing property crime (burglary, selling drugs illegally, etc) they should intervene to stop the criminal via non-lethal methods, with escalation detailed above, but not pursue a suspect if they flee. If they are pacified, then statements and evidence shall be taken for further legal usage, but the suspect released on bail due to lack of resources to hold them during prosecution.]

Valance: “This is mostly so they can't go on selling drugs or breaking into cars in front of our soldiers noses and not be responded to: it's intended as a deterrent more than a proactive measure.”

Hill: “That also looks fine.”

Saturn: “Good. Then we can proceed to the vote?”

Valance: “Sure, if there are no objections.”

Amnesty: “I have no objections.”

Saturn: “We will now vote on accepting the submitted document as binding orders for the SDF during the full transitional period. Register your votes now.”

Saturn: Support

William: Support

Valance: Support

Amnesty: Support

Hill: Support

Saturn: “In a 5-0 vote, this committee confirms that the given document constitutes binding orders for the duration of the transition period. The document will be publicly released shortly, as well as distributed by SDF Central Command. Any further comments?”

Valance: “I hope this represent the first step to restoring Order and law over Sirta. Good work, ladies and gentlemen.”

Amnesty: “I am ambivalent about how the transitional SDF policing will go, but hopefully we can get new police structures instituted quickly.”

Saturn: “Well, that is not something this committee can ensure. We'll have to rely on the Minister of Internal Security.”

Amnesty: I was using "we" to mean the current government, my apologies for the ambiguity.”

Hill: “Hopefully this period of transition will be brief and smooth.”

Saturn: “Strange choice of words, for an alleged member of the opposition. At any rate, this meeting is over. May we not have to meet again before the transition is over.”

"While I appreciate the sentiment behind this bill, its' implementation of that sentiment is deficient and may prove harmful over the long-term. It is irrational to expect that an elected position will remain fully impartial in all future elections. On the contrary, this bill only intensifies the problem it was designed to solve, as it makes the very process of fair elections dependent on the will of the majority of interested citizens at specific points in time. One doesn't need to be a historian to understand the dangers this presents. I oppose this bill vehemently.

The current process, which has an impartial organization under the Guardian Council manage all elections, with observers from all parties registered for a specific election present during all of its' stages, is a superior alternative, one that has already been proven in practice."

Comrade Bookchin

"I am sorry but I can not let this go unanswered, and this is me as an ELECTED member of Parliament speaking personally and not party line.

Madame Collins, you are an appointed member of this Parliament, who was appointed by a council. A council that, for all intents and purposes, appointed itself into existence to wield massive political power over democratically elected officials.

And yet you want to lecture us on tyranny and authoritarian rule. For someone with your background, you forget your Paine:

Thomas Paine posted:

There never did, there never will, and there never can, exist a Parliament, or any description of men, or any generation of men, in any country, possessed of the right or the power of binding and controlling posterity to the “end of time,” or of commanding forever how the world shall be governed, or who shall govern it; and therefore all such clauses, acts
or declarations by which the makers of them attempt to do what they have neither the right nor the power to do, nor the power to execute, are in themselves null and void.

Every age and generation must be as free to act for itself in all cases as the age and generations which preceded it. The vanity and presumption of governing beyond the grave is the most ridiculous and insolent of all tyrannies. Man has no property in man; neither has any generation a property in the generations which are to follow.

Your comparison of a democratically elected office to oversee elections to tyranny of Vallstein is laughable and reminds me of the old idiom that 'people in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks'. Have you not considered the danger it presents to provide one un-elected branch of government that holds enormous power, with no real term limits mind you, to immortal persons? That you promote and cheer on such authoritarian ideals while criticizing democratic ones makes me wonder of your true intentions. I hope that I am mistaken."

HiHo ChiRho fucked around with this message at Dec 26, 2017 around 04:35

"The Honourable Member will note this act does not supersede or expressly replace the Guardian Council system of appointees from on high. It mirrors and supplements it, so that we have the advantage of the people's representatives looking out for the people in addition to the Guardian Council's representatives looking out to safeguard the spirit of the revolution. We have more scrutiny, and scrutiny which is not beholden to power, but to the people themselves whose voices at all times need to be heard, especially when those in power think it might be expedient to silence them, be it in this generation or hundreds of years down the line. I note the Honourable Member did not propose their own solution when the bill was in the drafting phase, or postulate an amendment, but only speaks up now, prior to the vote. This is a concerning manner of conducting the business of this chamber, is it not?"

Representatives, ministers, people of Sirta, I am proud to announce that Apex Industries, in cooperation with the Charlotte Piero Memorial University, is prepared to begin construction of--and I will readily admit that I am guilty of some vanity here--the Vanderbush Center for Engineering and Material Sciences. While biotechnology has long been the flagship industry of Sirta, that is a far cry from it being the only one. It is thanks to the hard work of the industrious citizens of Topaz that Apex has succeeded as it has, and as the gears of its economy start up again in earnest, I would like to take the opportunity to give back to that community. The VCEMS will be constructed and equipped to the fullest ability of Apex Industries--and if I know the students of Topaz at all, they will soon push that envelope even further. We have a bright future ahead of us, in more ways than one. Thank you.

Thank you for that indulgence. Now, while I hold the podium, I have a less cheerful matter to address--our Constitutional Court. While the vast majority of the appointments to the court were well-qualified and widely accepted, there were others that... were not. Furthermore, the process of these appointments occurred behind closed doors, obscured from Parliament as a whole, who had no say in the matter. While the committee in charge of appointments did have members of the opposition, transcripts show that they were quite easily overruled by the rest of the committee, and Parliaments' citizen seats had no input whatsoever. While this amendment cannot be applied retroactively, I feel that there is an additional step required in the process going forward. To that end, I submit...

The Constitutional Court Appointment Amendment posted:

WHEREAS the Constitutional Court is the most powerful court in Sirta, and

WHEREAS the justices of the Constitutional Court serve a lifetime term,

THEREFORE, the candidates for the Constitutional Court chosen by the Judicial Appointments Committee must first be confirmed by a majority vote of Parliament before assuming office.

"Your comparison of a democratically elected office to oversee elections to tyranny of Vallstein is laughable and reminds me of the old idiom that 'people in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks'. Have you not considered the danger it presents to provide one unelected branch of government that holds enormous power, with no real term limits mind you, to immortal persons? That you promote and cheer on such authoritarian ideals while criticizing democratic ones makes me wonder of your true intentions. I hope that I am mistaken."

"Don't put words in my mouth, Minister. I didn't say or imply that an elected office to oversee elections would be tyrannical. I am merely concerned about entrusting tasks vital for the proper functioning of our democracy itself to democratically elected officials. Should judges be elected as well? Prosecutors? Generals? What this bill proposes is functionally equivalent to entrusting the party that received a plurality of the vote in a given district with running the next election. Surely, you can see how that can lead to bias and therefore undermine the concept of free and fair elections?

Even as recently as today, there has been a constitutional amendment proposed to have appointments to the Constitutional Court be beholden to political interests. I am warning you Minister, as well as all other members of this Parliament - do not go down this road without understanding where it might lead you. It may not seem like it now, but you too could find yourself in the opposition one day."

Since the election, the government has put into motion several major policies intended to reverse the downward trajectory of the country following the disastrous Greene administration, and fulfill the high expectations of the citizens. The current status of these policies is as follows:

* SIRTRAK – The Sirtan Transportation Network has been nationalized and placed under the management of a new government organization, with the SIRTRAK advisory board being appointed and confirmed last month. Despite this, very little has changed on the ground, with the STN operating exactly as it did before and the same employees working in the same way but receiving their salary from a new source. It falls to the advisory board to decide on meaningful actions such as starting the promised repair project and a corresponding mass recruitment of temporary workers. The matter of compensation to the previous owners also remains to be determined by the Ministry of Infrastructure.

* Truth and Reconciliation – Having been officially created last month, the Commission has already received 1,386 claims, most filed by individual citizens against former members of the defunct Public Security Force and municipal police officers. Due to necessary delays stemming from administrative needs, the Commission will only start examining claims this month.

Since writing about each and every claim would be infeasible, I will only briefly summarize entire classes of similar claims, and only elaborate when it comes to important or interesting ones. Regardless, as the only player on the TRC, mcclay can give their opinion on any individual claim or group of similar claims, as well as ask for additional details, call and question witnesses and so on. Since the TRC’s proceedings are broadcasted live, they can do that both here in the thread, and in the relevant semi-public discord channel, whichever they find more convenient.

* Police Reform – All municipal police forces have been dissolved and the SDF now patrols the streets of Sirta’s cities. The CLF and the few other militias were granted legitimacy as part of the Militia Union. The New Sirtan Police is currently in the early stages of organization as a sizable recruitment program is underway, and new recruits are undergoing training. The New Federal Police, built on the back of the former Investigative Agency, Government Guard and a small wave of stringently vetted recruits, is gradually coalescing into a functional structure. Most estimates show that this transitional period will be over in about 2 months.

The SDF's policing has gone without any major incidents so far, as soldiers patrol the streets and keep order while refraining from actively pursuing non-violent criminals or going after organized crime. However, there were some confrontations, as could be expected. Over the entirety of March, the SDF detained 76 suspects and killed 27 violent criminals, while 13 soldiers were injured and 5 were killed in the course of carrying out their duties.

* Tax Enforcement – An adequately staffed and funded Taxation and Revenues division has made substantial progress in clamping down on tax evasion with the aid of the enforcement mechanisms granted by Bill F-1, but the true extent of finances tied up in organized crime is only now becoming clear, so not much more progress is likely to be made without a major crackdown.

* Education Improvement – Opening a Civic Education Center in Topaz, as well as making all existing vocational education tuition free are major improvements, but more can be done. The goals of making all public educational institutions tuition free and the practical implementation of the Bootstrap Act are yet to be achieved.

* Care and Shelter Program – The newly created Care and Shelter Agency has completed a full evaluation of the 352 residential properties in its’ disposal and has partitioned them into 8,091 living units with shared bathrooms and kitchens. Arrangements have been made for regular food deliveries and the availability of medical care. An information campaign has been undertaken, and 734 homeless citizens have already been processed and will enter their new homes this week. They will be housed for at least a year, after which their status will be reevaluated.

* People’s Assemblies – Exploratory steps are being taken. Preparations are being made for a referendum on the 28th of April.

* Census – Phase 1 of the census is underway.

If you want more information on the current status of any other policies, don’t hesitate to ask.

With the passage of the Bootstrap Act, it is up to our discretion to provide subjects to the Sirtan people. I would like to hear recommendations from the directors as to what coursework would work well with such implementation as well as any relevant testing and exams to be required.

"Don't put words in my mouth, Minister. I didn't say or imply that an elected office to oversee elections would be tyrannical. I am merely concerned about entrusting tasks vital for the proper functioning of our democracy itself to democratically elected officials. Should judges be elected as well? Prosecutors? Generals? What this bill proposes is functionally equivalent to entrusting the party that received a plurality of the vote in a given district with running the next election. Surely, you can see how that can lead to bias and therefore undermine the concept of free and fair elections?

Even as recently as today, there has been a constitutional amendment proposed to have appointments to the Constitutional Court be beholden to political interests. I am warning you Minister, as well as all other members of this Parliament - do not go down this road without understanding where it might lead you. It may not seem like it now, but you too could find yourself in the opposition one day."

And why shouldn't judges, prosecutors, and generals be elected? Why are you so afraid of the people's will?

And why shouldn't judges, prosecutors, and generals be elected? Why are you so afraid of the people's will?

"Because the application of the law, individual guilt and the safety of our country shouldn't be at the mercy of temporary popular sentiments. Making a position elected fundamentally shifts the priorities and considerations involved in decision making. When it comes to the bill under consideration, electing those ensuring the fairness of our elections is inherently dangerous, for the reasons I have repeatedly outlined. Neither you nor the Minister have bothered to address the core of my concerns, that such a move will throw the fairness of any future election into doubt and introduce an unavoidable conflict of interest. Instead, you spent your time on dishonest insinuations. Unless you want to speak of the actual issue at hand, I have nothing more to say to you."

"The Honourable Member will note this act does not supersede or expressly replace the Guardian Council system of appointees from on high. It mirrors and supplements it, so that we have the advantage of the people's representatives looking out for the people in addition to the Guardian Council's representatives looking out to safeguard the spirit of the revolution.

"This is a limited view of the issue. Your proposal would have representatives of the plurality of the people at a specific moment in time directly overseeing other elections. Let me ask you this - what do you think is the point of holding multiple elections in the first place? Why not have one election determine the course of the country hereafter? I trust you know the reasons: people's opinions may change, the government needs the threat of being voted out by the population to keep it working for the people's interest. Yet, your proposal would make it possible for officials aligned with the currently popular parties to pass judgment on future elections and potentially declare them to be unfair if they don't go the way they want them to go, undermining the process itself.

Representatives from all parties registered in a specific election are already invited to act as observers, with their explicitly partisan status being known to all, reducing the potential harm false accusations can have on the electoral process."

From: Danube, Minister of Interior
To: Director of Child Care, Ministry of Interior
Subject: Executive Summary
I'd like a summary of the activities of your department, including a breakdown of the status of the children in the program, that is, what portion are in foster care, in orphanages, etc. Further, I'd like to hear from you what effect the increased funding of your department is having, if the children are receiving better care as a result, and what challenges your staff continue to face in providing child care.

Once again my congratulations on your new position, and the able work you have done thus far. I've been reviewing your reports regarding the recruitment and training of the new body of men who will lead the fight against crime in all it's forms, and have been thoroughly satisfied on all fronts. Forward!

As we reach a stage where we can begin operations, I believe it's time to start focusing on our first primary threat: Organized Crime. As you no doubt know OC has been a persistent scourge on our nation, corrupting all it comes into contact with and destroying what it cannot taint. No longer.

Section II- Prohibited Crimes
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person who has received any income derived, directly or indirectly, from a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt in which such person has participated as a principal, to use or invest, directly or indirectly, any part of such income, or the proceeds of such income, in acquisition of any interest in, or the establishment or operation of, any enterprise

(b) It shall be unlawful for any person through a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt to acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly, any interest in or control of any enterprise

(c) It shall be unlawful for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise’s affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt.

(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to conspire to violate any of the provisions of subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this section.

Section III - Penalties

(a) Whoever violates any provision of Section II shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years (or for life if the violation is based on a racketeering activity for which the maximum penalty includes life imprisonment), or both, and shall forfeit to the government of Sirta

(1) any interest the person has acquired or maintained in violation of Section II;
(2) any—
(A) interest in;
(B) security of;
(C) claim against; or
(D) property or contractual right of any kind affording a source of influence over;
any enterprise which the person has established, operated, controlled, conducted, or participated in the conduct of, in violation of section II; and
(3) any property constituting, or derived from, any proceeds which the person obtained, directly or indirectly, from racketeering activity or unlawful debt collection in violation of Section II

(1) Upon application of the Sirtan Government, the court may enter a restraining order or injunction, require the execution of a satisfactory performance bond, or take any other action to preserve the availability of property described in subsection (a) for forfeiture under this section—
(A) upon the filing of an indictment or information charging a violation of Section II and alleging that the property with respect to which the order is sought would, in the event of conviction, be subject to forfeiture under this section; or
(B) prior to the filing of such an indictment or information, if, after notice to persons appearing to have an interest in the property and opportunity for a hearing, the court determines that—
(i) there is a substantial probability that the Sirtan Government will prevail on the issue of forfeiture and that failure to enter the order will result in the property being destroyed, removed from the jurisdiction of the court, or otherwise made unavailable for forfeiture; and
(ii) the need to preserve the availability of the property through the entry of the requested order outweighs the hardship on any party against whom the order is to be entered:

Provided, however, That an order entered pursuant to subparagraph (B) shall be effective for not more than ninety days, unless extended by the court for good cause shown or unless an indictment or information described in subparagraph (A) has been filed.

(2) A temporary restraining order under this subsection may be entered upon application of the Sirtan Government without notice or opportunity for a hearing when an information or indictment has not yet been filed with respect to the property, if the Sirtan Government demonstrates that there is probable cause to believe that the property with respect to which the order is sought would, in the event of conviction, be subject to forfeiture under this section and that provision of notice will jeopardize the availability of the property for forfeiture. Such a temporary order shall expire not more than fourteen days after the date on which it is entered, unless extended for good cause shown or unless the party against whom it is entered consents to an extension for a longer period. A hearing requested concerning an order entered under this paragraph shall be held at the earliest possible time, and prior to the expiration of the temporary order.

(c) Following the seizure of property thereof the Attorney General, in connection with the Government of Sirta will make necessary and proper arrangements for the further disposition of the relevant assets

sniper4625 fucked around with this message at Dec 28, 2017 around 19:30

"This is a limited view of the issue. Your proposal would have representatives of the plurality of the people at a specific moment in time directly overseeing other elections. Let me ask you this - what do you think is the point of holding multiple elections in the first place? Why not have one election determine the course of the country hereafter? I trust you know the reasons: people's opinions may change, the government needs the threat of being voted out by the population to keep it working for the people's interest. Yet, your proposal would make it possible for officials aligned with the currently popular parties to pass judgment on future elections and potentially declare them to be unfair if they don't go the way they want them to go, undermining the process itself.

Representatives from all parties registered in a specific election are already invited to act as observers, with their explicitly partisan status being known to all, reducing the potential harm false accusations can have on the electoral process."

"Let me ask you this: Who are the people likely to trust more, someone they chose, or someone appointed by those set over them from above? Democracy requires trust! It requires a minimum of obscurantism, a maximum of openness! Let the people have someone looking out for them, not just those explicitly tied to political parties! It is the will of the electorate, not solely the will of those who wish to govern them, that should prevail. This is an additional safeguard, an extra layer of observation not tied either to partisan politics or to the Guardian Council, and it is not for your sake, nor for the sake of any party represented here - including mine! - but for the people whose trust is absolutely required if our system is to succeed. If there are accusations of unfairness, investigate them! Let the truth be known, and if that truth is 'a corrupt official allied with a corrupt party acted to attempt an undermining of the electoral process', splash it on banner headlines across the nation so that fresh change can be effected to prevent such malfeasance! Nothing is truly futureproofed, nothing could ever be, but we do the best we can with the tools at our disposal. This is one such tool, and the best use that we can manage shall be made of it!"

Even as recently as today, there has been a constitutional amendment proposed to have appointments to the Constitutional Court be beholden to political interests. I am warning you Minister, as well as all other members of this Parliament - do not go down this road without understanding where it might lead you. It may not seem like it now, but you too could find yourself in the opposition one day."

Our current process saw a 27-year-old with no practical legal experience appointed to the highest court in Sirta. While I'm sure the committee had their reasons, I personally believe it amply demonstrates that these appointments are inherently political. That the Justices serve for live is an excellent step for maintaining consistency on the court, and independence from any given government, the fact that the appointment process took place entirely in back rooms, with many parties in Parliament being afforded no say whatsoever--whether they were in government or in the opposition--means that the process as it stands is unfortunately rather undemocratic. The process must be done openly, with of Sirta's chosen representatives allowed to have input.

Once the operating costs of the government listed under Miscellaneous Expenses have all been met, any additional income provided by the 9% share shall be deposited into an emergency fund and saved for later use.

(If your Ministry is missing a hard floor on monthly credits and you would like one added, yell at me either here or in the Discord and I'll edit one in)

Crazycryodude fucked around with this message at Dec 30, 2017 around 01:24

Our current process saw a 27-year-old with no practical legal experience appointed to the highest court in Sirta. While I'm sure the committee had their reasons, I personally believe it amply demonstrates that these appointments are inherently political. That the Justices serve for live is an excellent step for maintaining consistency on the court, and independence from any given government, the fact that the appointment process took place entirely in back rooms, with many parties in Parliament being afforded no say whatsoever--whether they were in government or in the opposition--means that the process as it stands is unfortunately rather undemocratic. The process must be done openly, with of Sirta's chosen representatives allowed to have input.

Legal experience, without a strong moral compass, is worse than useless. Having someone dedicated to justice is more important, and legal experience can be picked up along the way.

The drafting phase is now over. The voting phase will last until Monday - the 1st of January - at 16:00 UTC. The proposals up for vote are:

1. The AMR Accountability Act, submitted by Member Amnesty.
2. The Rehabilitation Act, submitted by Member Amnesty.
3. The Free and Fair Elections Act, submitted by Member Subtallier.
4. Constitutional Amendment on Appointments to the Constitutional Court, submitted by Minister of Foreign Affairs Vanderbush.
5. The Opposing Syndicated Crime and Racketeering Act, submitted by Minister of Internal Security Radek.
6. The Budget Bill for May 3062 - December 3062, submitted by Prime Minister Luxemburg.

AFancyQuestionMark fucked around with this message at Dec 30, 2017 around 16:46

Rehabilitation Act – This bill doesn’t specify the scope of the rehabilitation program and the number of rehabilitation centers, among other details. According to our analysis of existing private facilities, required funds could range from 6 million NSC in bulk and 2.5 million NSC a month at the lower end to 15 million NSC in bulk and 6 million NSC a month at the higher end.

Free and Fair Elections Act – Running the required elections will cost about 4.5 million NSC in bulk. Adequately funding the new Offices of Electoral Oversight will require 300,000 NSC a month.

2. The Rehabilitation Act, submitted by Member Amnesty. - NAY
An admirable goal, but with limited resources unfortunately not a priority

3. The Free and Fair Elections Act, submitted by Member Subtallier. - abstain
A good and proper idea, that unfortunately would be a comparatively large drain on our limited budget considering our next elections will not be for some time. Awaiting some further input on this one, and certainly would be open to it somewhat closer to the next scheduled elections.

5. The Opposing Syndicated Crime and Racketeering Act, submitted by Minister of Internal Security Radek. - AYE
Obviously. Let us sharpen our blades and deprive those who profit off the people their misgotten gains.

6. The Budget Bill for May 3062 - December 3062, submitted by Prime Minister Luxemburg. - AYE
Of course.

sniper4625 fucked around with this message at Jan 1, 2018 around 03:29

Would you please confirm who created the educational materials for the Revolutionary Ideals class? Also, please provide a basic outline on what is taught in this class.

As with all new classes introduced by the transitional government, the educational materials were conceived and written by members of the academic wing of the Popular Resistance, which was centered around the various Social Sciences departments within Sard University. As far as I can tell, the overall high-level direction behind the new classes was provided by Professor Elizabeth Styles, the person Councilor Minerva was based on.

Currently, the Revolutionary Ideals classes are mostly taught by existing teachers who participated in the Popular Resistance, and they involve delving into "core principles of the revolution" such as the government's responsibilities to the people, the protection of Citizen's Rights, active public participation in politics, intolerance to corruption and oppression, honest and accountable government, etc.

Over the past educational year, most students have proven exceptionally receptive to these ideals, especially in the cities, perhaps due to the fact that many of them spent their formative years under Greene's administration and personally marched in the Popular Resistance's protests.

2. The Rehabilitation Act, submitted by Member Amnesty. - NAY. A wonderful idea that we should look to pursue at some point, but with funding requirements being both high and vague, I'm afraid I can't support this at this time.

3. The Free and Fair Elections Act, submitted by Member Subtallier.ABSTAIN. I have similar funding issues here, but not to the same extent. Still, I feel hesitant to commit to it at this time.

4. Constitutional Amendment on Appointments to the Constitutional Court, submitted by Minister of Foreign Affairs Vanderbush.AYE. Would that I had submitted this amendment at the outset, but that delay only served to show its necessity.

5. The Opposing Syndicated Crime and Racketeering Act, submitted by Minister of Internal Security Radek.AYE. I am proud to have had a small hand in the creation of OSCAR, although the esteemed Minister Radek was far more responsible for the final--excellent--state of this bill.

6. The Budget Bill for May 3062 - December 3062, submitted by Prime Minister Luxemburg. - AYE. I am particularly glad to have a longer-term budget, even if I would like a touch more funding for my own ministry, though I understand that it is not presently a priority.